From: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Arjun Roy <arjunroy@google.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the net-next tree
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2021 08:09:06 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKH8qBvQQxJLBRxEs8=Vq3CWLSr+m8V3Cwm0wgakLDcRHieYVg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210125111223.2540294c@canb.auug.org.au>
Thanks, the merge resolution looks good to me!
On Sun, Jan 24, 2021 at 4:12 PM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the bpf-next tree got a conflict in:
>
> net/ipv4/tcp.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 7eeba1706eba ("tcp: Add receive timestamp support for receive zerocopy.")
>
> from the net-next tree and commit:
>
> 9cacf81f8161 ("bpf: Remove extra lock_sock for TCP_ZEROCOPY_RECEIVE")
>
> from the bpf-next tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
>
> diff --cc net/ipv4/tcp.c
> index e1a17c6b473c,26aa923cf522..000000000000
> --- a/net/ipv4/tcp.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp.c
> @@@ -4160,18 -4098,13 +4160,20 @@@ static int do_tcp_getsockopt(struct soc
> if (copy_from_user(&zc, optval, len))
> return -EFAULT;
> lock_sock(sk);
> - err = tcp_zerocopy_receive(sk, &zc);
> + err = tcp_zerocopy_receive(sk, &zc, &tss);
> + err = BPF_CGROUP_RUN_PROG_GETSOCKOPT_KERN(sk, level, optname,
> + &zc, &len, err);
> release_sock(sk);
> - if (len >= offsetofend(struct tcp_zerocopy_receive, err))
> - goto zerocopy_rcv_sk_err;
> + if (len >= offsetofend(struct tcp_zerocopy_receive, msg_flags))
> + goto zerocopy_rcv_cmsg;
> switch (len) {
> + case offsetofend(struct tcp_zerocopy_receive, msg_flags):
> + goto zerocopy_rcv_cmsg;
> + case offsetofend(struct tcp_zerocopy_receive, msg_controllen):
> + case offsetofend(struct tcp_zerocopy_receive, msg_control):
> + case offsetofend(struct tcp_zerocopy_receive, flags):
> + case offsetofend(struct tcp_zerocopy_receive, copybuf_len):
> + case offsetofend(struct tcp_zerocopy_receive, copybuf_address):
> case offsetofend(struct tcp_zerocopy_receive, err):
> goto zerocopy_rcv_sk_err;
> case offsetofend(struct tcp_zerocopy_receive, inq):
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-25 16:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-25 0:12 linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the net-next tree Stephen Rothwell
2021-01-25 16:09 ` Stanislav Fomichev [this message]
2021-01-25 18:03 ` Arjun Roy
2021-02-14 21:12 ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-02-14 21:40 ` Arjun Roy
2021-02-14 23:00 ` Stephen Rothwell
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-12-17 23:29 Stephen Rothwell
2023-12-14 23:56 Stephen Rothwell
2023-11-30 22:47 Stephen Rothwell
2023-04-13 16:12 broonie
2023-04-13 16:31 ` Christian Ehrig
2023-03-19 23:09 Stephen Rothwell
2023-03-20 3:17 ` Bagas Sanjaya
2023-02-19 23:00 Stephen Rothwell
2023-02-20 11:53 ` Alexander Lobakin
2023-02-06 23:19 Stephen Rothwell
2022-05-11 1:10 Stephen Rothwell
2020-08-03 3:05 Stephen Rothwell
2020-07-21 2:16 Stephen Rothwell
2020-07-21 8:53 ` Lorenzo Bianconi
2020-07-21 2:12 Stephen Rothwell
2019-11-24 23:58 Stephen Rothwell
2019-11-25 1:19 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-07-01 4:47 Stephen Rothwell
2018-11-21 23:36 Stephen Rothwell
2018-04-26 0:49 Stephen Rothwell
2018-04-26 7:56 ` Daniel Borkmann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAKH8qBvQQxJLBRxEs8=Vq3CWLSr+m8V3Cwm0wgakLDcRHieYVg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=sdf@google.com \
--cc=arjunroy@google.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).